State's top jurist avoids libel cases in wake of suit

November 30, 2006|By Michael Higgins, Tribune staff reporter.

Illinois Chief Justice Robert Thomas scored big when he won a $7 million jury verdict earlier this month in a high-profile libel lawsuit. But when it comes to libel suits before the state's highest court, Thomas is apparently sitting on the sidelines.

On Wednesday, the state Supreme Court announced it had agreed to hear a libel case involving a controversial ad for a clothier that ran in the Sun-Times in 2004. But Thomas "took no part" in the court's decision to accept the case, according to the notice issued by the court.

On Thursday, the court is expected to rule in a defamation case in which a Chicago defense lawyer says that a true-crime author falsely suggested that he had taken a $1 million fee to fix a criminal trial. Thomas did not participate in that case.

Thomas also stepped aside in June when the court decided a libel case concerning a trade magazine's reports on a hard-fought patent lawsuit.

Thomas has not stated publicly how he is handling the potential conflict between his own lawsuit and cases before the court. He declined to elaborate Wednesday.

"Under the code of conduct, a judge is not required to state the reasons why he chooses not to participate in a case," Supreme Court spokesman Joseph Tybor said Wednesday.

"The record will show that since [Thomas'] lawsuit was pending, there were three defamation suits that have come before the court, and Justice Thomas has not participated in any of them," Tybor added.

Thomas won the libel verdict Nov. 14 against the Kane County Chronicle. The paper's former columnist, Bill Page, had accused Thomas of allowing political considerations to influence his handling of a matter before the Supreme Court.

Page testified at the trial that confidential sources told him that Thomas had pushed for a severe punishment of former Kane County State's Atty. Meg Gorecki in a disciplinary case, but backed off after local Republican leaders agreed to support a judicial candidate that Thomas favored.

But Page never disclosed the sources of his information, and at the trial the newspaper did not produce any witness to support the accusation.

The three libel cases before the Illinois Supreme Court could have presented a conflict of interest--at least indirectly--for Thomas, Jeffrey Shaman, law professor at DePaul University, said Wednesday. He said Thomas was wise to disqualify himself.

"The Supreme Court is interpreting the law--making the law--regarding defamation," Shaman said. "We don't know that there would have been a ruling in any of these cases that would have affected Justice Thomas' claim in his own case. ... But there's a possibility."

The U.S. Supreme Court has held, for example, that a state supreme court justice in Alabama was wrong to rule on an insurance case when his wife had brought a similar claim and could benefit from the court's decision, Shaman said.

In addition, "even if there was no actual conflict of interest, there could be an appearance of one," Shaman said.

A Chronicle attorney has said the newspaper plans to appeal the verdict.

Thomas attorney Joe Power said earlier this week that after the verdict, Thomas offered to accept a lower settlement in exchange for a retraction, but that the newspaper has not responded.